By faith alone or by faith and acting?

The OP presented the problem of the "Lordship controversy" (to which I referred) by suggesting that faith w/o works can save (i.e. faith alone or faith and acting?) I confronted it in the same way MacArthur did by defining the different kinds of faith: Dead faith versus living faith. Living faith IS 'faith and action' while dead faith is 'faith alone...without action')

You just admitted this when you spoke of the demon's faith as being 'deficient.' What makes it deficient? NO ACTION/obedience. A lost man can have that same deficient (i.e. dead) faith, but he shouldn't think that is going to save him because it won't.

And I set out to show you that I agree that truth can be clearly revealed, known to be true and believed without choosing to do so, (like demons do) and still not be saved.

 

Notice how you have to keep adding the words, 'to be saved' or 'in order to be saved.' Your words added to confound an otherwise simple matter.

Define 'dead faith' and be done with it.

Read what I wrote again: "Someone can believe that Jesus is the son of God and NOT choose to follow him as the Lord of their life. (like a demon)"

Are the words "salvation comes..." in my quote? Nope, added by you. If what you are arguing is true then demons would be saved (which is the same argument MacArthur makes against his critics too, interestingly enough)

What if you believe with dead faith, not living faith? Are you still saved in that instant? That is my point. You fail to draw that distinction. There are different kinds of 'faith.' You admitted it when you spoke of the 'deficient faith' of Demons.

Right, they have a dead faith, that is what we are talking about. Are you saying a person can't have the same kind of dead faith as the demons do?

:laugh:
Yeah, the part Edwards addresses in that same quote regarding God's permissive and active decrees...remember the part you refused to affirm?

Fine, but he does disagree with some Calvinists as this has been a matter of some controversy even among Calvinists over the years. That is just a fact. I just suspect you and some others are not aware of the differing approaches associated with this particular distinction.

The point is that no one perishes for lack of atonement, as SOME Calvinists tend to indicate by suggesting the satisfaction of divine justice is not equally available/applicable to all.

Backing off?!? NOOO, adding to... as these were all scholars from the "Princeton" tradition and were targets in this particular controversy. Read up on it sometime.

:laugh: Ok. I look forward to that.

 

Faith is what it is. It is either authentic or its not. Its either sufficient or its not. Its either dead or living. So when you use the word 'faith' without indicating which kind of faith you are talking about it confuses the matter. I affirm that 'living faith alone saves.' But like MacArthur I affirm that living faith works.

I never said you make faith sufficient or you make it save. When I asks what makes the demon's faith deficient, I simply meant what part of your definition of deficit faith makes it deficit. In other words, what is the difference between your definition of living faith and dead faith? Is it not obedience?

 

The faith of demons is merely 'mental' knowledge, assent and belief that there is a God. It's a given, nothing in it is salvific.

This same type of faith in human persons is invalid and can never be salvific. It rests upon the persons mental knowledge and assent that said believes there is a God. It is purely faith in ones own ability to acknowledge a belief in God. It is representative of inherent faith, and is in contrast to saving faith.

The above is one reason we rightly reject the illustrations that believing in Jesus is the same action as walking on a bridge believing it will support a person, or other myriad illustrations akin to this.

Saving faith is the gift of God. It has works. It is not the cause of salvation, it is the product of salvation.

 

Yes, saving faith is indeed the gift of God and very real to everyone who exercises it.

 

Well fellas, this is the great controversy that has raged for centuries. One group says we must believe only, the other side says faith without works is dead. We know the scriptures cannot contradict themselves, so there must be a view where both are true and do not contradict each other.

I believe the answer is shown in Luke 17.

Luke 17:5 And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith.
6 And the Lord said, If ye had faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root, and be thou planted in the sea; and it should obey you.
7 But which of you, having a servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat?
8 And will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink?
9 Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not.
10 So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.

Here the disciples asked Jesus to increase their faith. Jesus turns it around and tells them if they had faith as a grain of mustard seed, they could say to a sycamine tree to be plucked up by the root and cast into the sea, and it would obey you.

But then Jesus directly starts talking to his disciples about being servants in verse 7. He asks that if a servant comes from the field, will his master tell him to sit down and eat? Or will the master rather tell the servant to serve him first, and afterward the servant can eat and drink?

What does this have to do with increasing faith? It seems to argue that faith will be increased through service to Jesus our Master.

But I believe we see the answer to faith and works in verses 9 and 10. Jesus asks his disciples if the Master will thank the servant because he performed his duties. Jesus says NO. Then he says likewise, when we have DONE all things that have been commanded us, our attitude should be that we have simply performed our duty.

So, we are saved by faith, but true faith will obey and do what Jesus commands us. But our attitude should not be that we have earned salvation through our works or merit, but simply performed our duty and obligation to Jesus who has saved us and is our Master.

So, do what you are told, but remember you are saved by grace alone and not because of any merit on our part.

This is a fine line.

 

Which one of these is living faith:

1. Indy stands on a ledge saying out loud "I believe..." but never takes a step.

2. Indy stands on a ledge saying out loud "I believe..." while taking a step into open space.

Now, if you believe someone can spend their whole life on the ledge professing faith without ever stepping out and be saved, go right ahead; but I'm with James, "faith without deeds is dead." Profession without stepping is dead.

 

We need to back up and define our terms if you want continue Luke:

Define what you mean by "faith."

Here are some from MacArthur which have brought many of the same type of arguments you seem to be suggesting:

"The Greek word translated 'belief' is not referring merely to intellectual attainment or mental acquiescence but a wholehearted acceptance of everything that is implied in the claims of Christ. You need to believe that Jesus is God and that He died for your sins, committing your whole life to Him in sacrifice and serving Him as Lord." (Assurance of Victory--1 John 5, Moody Press, p.12).

"Submission to the will of God, to Christ’s lordship, and to the guiding of the Spirit is an essential, not an optional, part of saving faith" (EPHESIANS, p. 249).

"Saving faith is a placing of oneself totally in submission to the Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 1-8, p. 205).

 

Sorry, Skan, but I have to utterly disagree with what you've written here. What you've described with this analogy is NOT what James was talking about at all; and moreover, it completely disregards what Ephesians 2:10 tells us.

In my opinion, which really isn't worth a plug nickel, I honestly believe what you've been trying to say is that a person who has saving faith has no problem stepping off the ledge; but where I disagree with you is that by not stepping off the ledge is somehow a "proof" that the individual lacks saving faith.

Profession followed by love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, tolerance -- and yes, faith ... those are the works that we are saved unto. Absence of these is an indication that there is something missing; and it is these things, and their opposites (also listed in Galatians 5) that we use as the measuring stick of faith.

If we have saving faith, these things will follow; if we merely believe, like the devils, then we are able, just like the devils, to continue with the works of the flesh.

 

I actually said 'never stepping'... If one 'never obeys' we can be sure their faith was dead... "You will know them by their fruit." That is not to say that even true believers don't have times in life where they are living in rebellion or disobedience though...if that is the way you took it.

I agree, so if they never follow what should WE, from our human perspective, conclude?

 

I have to close this thread due to it's length, but feel free to start a new one. Let me just restate for clarity. I don't believe we are saved by any work of our own, for even our greatest efforts are as filthy rags. But God, being great in love and rich in mercy takes those filthy rags and credits the works and righteousness of Christ to my account. Praise the Lord!